Leaderboard

I often wondered as a kid what exactly dreams are. Was it a last resort of a wishful thinking which takes the form of a dream, or was it a sacred, secretive way to inject yourself with a belief that you are not alone and perhaps, a deity grants you with the blessing to release a dream? In my eyes, dreams were a non-religious prayer, but a prayer nonetheless. It is somewhat beautiful, when humans cast a wish - create a dream. In my life, I always enjoyed listening to people's dreams. Maybe, it was a way to see how my dreams differed from theirs? Or perhaps, it was a way to see if dreams come true? I found myself in most unexpected places, listening to strangers' dreams. But I always enjoyed the ride. On a cog-wheeled train, during the harsh flames of summer - when the last thing you'd need is use more of your mind capacity for purposes other than hiding from the heat. Or that one time, during the frustrating waiting on the queue to pay my water bills back in the 2010s. On the airplane, whilst watching the pure white cotton-shaped clouds from above. Even the occasions given whilst awaiting the bus on a god-forsaken village bus-stop. I assure you, every stranger had a tale of dreams, sometimes they were long abandoned dreams. Sometimes they triggered the genuine smile of sorrow. And other times, they revealed regrets. However, somehow I realized that the purest form of dreams was when they were cast-aside. Like a flame in one's consciousness, almost comatose but not completely forgotten. I disliked when humans gave up on their dreams - somewhat, it was a calling from inside. If it hurt them, giving up on a dream, why then? Why giving up, then? Alas, soon I realized that it is the purest form when cast-aside because one's principles and inner justice manifested. Hence, a dream remained only in the realm of one's inner world. Some gave up because of their children or a family member, and even for the sake of friendship. Others gave up because fulfilling that dream meant to become who they would no longer recognize. And third, they were one of a kind - leaving a legacy behind. They passed on a dream, often so - a very sacred dream. Then I thought, "Ah...it is not that dreams are a last resort or a prayer. They are part of a tough fight - the fight with one's self in a world where values rarely prevail and the filth violate such values." Now, when I am half-way through the trials to fulfill my dream, I grow hesitant. Maybe is fatigue after the fights, maybe it is the human nature of questioning just about everything. Whatever is the case, I find it funny. How power leaves you, how silent nights grow loud, how sacred objectives lead to hell-bound heights. Then I thought, "Ah...it is not that dreams are a last resort, a prayer, or a part of a fight. They are an inner equation. Is it worth it?" Perhaps, to solve the equation, you have to be aware. A state which requires much more envision than what a dream cost is. One has to envision the greater good. Which again, I find funny. How do you define "good", even more - what makes it "greater"? Here, we come to the crossroad of philosophy and history. Was the fallout of Empires a result of a failed envision what constitutes "greater good" or probably, part of someone's very own dream to see the perish of an Empire? Or maybe both? The Beccarian idea of "morals" often so explain (and portray) that humans are rational beings in so far the cost-benefit is involved. You can go as far as you wish in time, and you will find that in the core of every civilization, that rationale prevailed. Perse, seeking mercy from the gods, sacrifices were made. For the sake of winning a war, scarifies were made. For the greater good meant people would follow the justice of gods, and later in history, the justice of emperors. Democracy is no different - in fact, democracy is the best outfit of 'for the greater good' based on the idea of "greatest happiness for the greatest number". You may wonder, what does it even have to do with "dreams"? There is a lot in correlation, I assure you. We are beings of a rationale - an underlying basis of our principles and beliefs. We choose, we rationalize, we prefer and we reject what we do not prefer. And a dream is part of your rationale. See, two rationales cannot co-exist. Only one would. The moment a dream clash with your rationale - the dream can no longer be. Which made me realized, "Ah...a dream is neither a last resort, a prayer, a part of a fight or an equation. A dream is a relation to who you are in reality". Which, again, I find funny. I selected this username for a reason. Often people, funnily, related to "Saga Masamune" - a manga character, I believe many are aware of. I wouldn't lie if I say that the name also made me think of him. However, the real reason I selected the name was in correlation to its multi-functionality. For one, it is often related to a long sequence of stories - a long saga of stories or achievements. Secondly, in its Japanese meaning - it is related to the hieroglyph which means "one's true colors" or "one's nature". I stand here today, wondering, who am I and why my dreams seem so related to any strangers' dream? Unfortunately, I cannot share my dream with you. Only select people know but I, somewhat, hesitate. Because my dream is both for the sake and for the loss - its price comes expensive. You lose a lot, and on the way of losing you acknowledge you were ready to lose. However, once you reach the crossroad of integrity, you cannot help but question the envision of "the greatest happiness for the greatest number". Dreams, appear, simple yet complex. To you, who may have not begun your journey to fulfill your dreams, and to you, who may have abandoned the journey....I wish to ask - is it worth it?

Have you ever heard of "The Golden Mean"? Or probably about the 'Virtue Theory'? Well, if we go back in Ancient Greece (of course, it is always Greece), and we talk to Aristotle (who, by the way, actually stole this idea from Ancient China) about what is 'courage', he would probably tell you the following thing. For a trait to be virtuous it has to be in a golden mean. That is to say, Aristotle believed that the equilibrium of 'virtue' is reached by a golden mean. But this idea of 'virtue' or 'being virtuous', we can expand it a bit further by "proper function". What is to be good or bad? What is proper function? Let's take for example a pen that has ink and its idea is to deliver ink for you to write. It's function is to write. Good pen is one that writes. Bad pen is one that doesn't write. It doesn't fulfill its function. Different entities have their own proper function, and believe it or not, it can be expanded to even human traits. But how 'proper function' actually applies on' good' vs. 'bad'? Well, Aristotle says that 'a good man practises good deeds, by practising good deeds he becomes a good man', so with the 'bad man'. Let's think of an architect. A good architect is one who builds good walls. By building good walls, over and over again, he can become a better architect. A good, very good one. A bad architect builds bad walls. Such architect who continues to build bad walls will continue being a bad architect for he practises 'bad walls'. So the idea of being virtuous depends on the practice. However, 'virtue' on its own - taken as 'a good thing' is questioned. What is the true color of 'virtue'? For it to function and be a virtuous act or a virtuous person, Aristotle mentions the golden mean. It is explained by the idea of 'courage'. Courage is seen as a virtue, a good thing to have! What is 'courage'? Well, one who is brave! X DING DING, WRONG. One who doesn't fear anything! X DING DING WRONG. One who sacrifices and fights for whatever is to be defended! X DING DING WRONG. We are not talking about 'linguistic definition', this is what you have to realize. For courage to be in its golden mean and be 'a good thing' (opposite of being bad and harmful), you have to feel fear but also bravery at the same time. A balance, of sorts. Aristotle says that if you have too much fear, 'courage' is in deficit and it results into 'cowardice'. Therefore, 'courage' that is in deficit gives a 'hypo-result'. Opposite, if 'bravery' is too much, 'courage' is in abundance and it results into 'recklessness'. Therefore, 'courage in exaggeration gives a 'hyper-result'. Apparently, a trait, an emotion or a metaphysical object can be rendered with a golden mean. This blog entry bends 'the golden mean' to show how a lie can become in its most dangerous and most damaging state through the use of 'truth' in deficit. So to say, utilizing the truth despite making a lie out of it. Let me put it that way. Have you heard of the saying, "Read between the lines"? Or.... "The truth is always somewhere in between"? Glad you have heard them, saves us both time. Have you ever deeply analyzed these statements? The perfect lie, my dear reader, and the hardest to catch, is the one that utilizes a small dose of the truth. It does not show the full color of 'truth', but it borrows from it to be painted by the shades of a truth. Does it start to make sense? Truth, according the golden mean is something very interesting. Can you even put a truth under a golden mean? Apparently you can with 'secrecy' which involves lack of honesty and excess of it. But how about 'truth'? Deficit of truth should, logically, result in a lie, but what is the exaggeration of a truth? Again a lie? Manipulation? Or probably Solomon's Wisdom? Let's switch now, 'lie in the golden mean'. Can a lie even have a golden mean? Some people may now come in and question the 'white lie'. Therefore, I want to scratch this with eagle claws. A white lie does not exist. It is a lie in its deficit. Let's end this long-lasting debate on 'white lie', okay? -_- It is a truth in deficit. Not enough truth is said, therefore, it is a lie but 'not harming one'. So people say. -_- So, a deficit - a white lie. What about a lie with exaggeration? Politics. -COUGH COUGH- Sorry, a joke slipped. Can a lie be in its exaggeration state? Having excess of it? People will say, "Look, it is still a lie anyway; what's the point of applying 'golden mean'?" Hmmmmmm. True. But using a golden mean can help bad people actually create/fabricate a lie very close to the truth and utilizing 'facts' to bend them in a way that takes away their truthfulness but still mislead because the 'receiver' is aware that 'such things indeed happened'. So, have you ever questioned 'history'? If you have, you may understand what I am saying. Question time, "Can a truth become a lie, and can a lie become a truth"? I leave this to more experienced philosophers.